The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-01-15
COMMERCE BETWEENSTA
The Senate Devotes an Extended Session
to Discussing the Question.
Messrs. Hoar and Sherman Oppose and Mr.
Edmunds Favors the CullOm Bill-lt Is
Finally Adopted BY a Vote of 43 to 10.

Wilson the House amendment to the Senate
bill for holding terms of United States court in
Bay City, Mich. Substituting East Saginaw for
Bay City,, was nonconcurred in, and a confer
ence asked.
Mr. Brown, from the committee on the Dis
srict of Columbia, reported back, favorably, the
House bill TO incorporate trustees OF the Young
Women's Christian Home of Washington, D. G.
Placed on the calendar.
Mr. Ingalls, introduced bill granting arrears
In certain cases to those pensioned by special |
acts
Mr.. Cullom moved to proceed to consideration |
Of the conference report on the interstate COM
ynerce bill. Agreed to-37 TO IL The nays were |
Messrs. Blair, Cameron. Chace Cheney, Frye,
Hawley Hoar, Morrill,, Sawyer, Sewell, Sher.
man and Spooner.
Before taking up the subject, Mr. ingalls, Of
fered a resolution calling on the Secretary Of the
Interior for information as to readjudication of
private land claims in New Mexico and Arizona
Adopted
Mr. Sabin introduced a bill to amend the act
Of March 30, 1875, granting to railroads the right
Of way through the public lands of the United
Etates Referred.
Mr.. SeweIl, from the conference committee on
the bill making an annual appropriation to pro-
vide arms and equipments for the militia, made
n report, reducing the appropriation from $780,
D00 to $500. 900, which was agreed to.
The Senate then resumed consideration of the
Interstate commerce bill, and was addressed by
Mr.. Hoar. The pending legislation,
he said, was the result of a popu-
lar movement spreading over the last
twenty years: q movement which had his
hearty sympathy and official support from the
beginning. so far as it was in favor OF cheap
Transportation and of regulating the conduct of
the great railroads in those things which affect
the convenience of the people That was essen
tial to the very life of the community to which
NE belonged. He did not think that any candid
person would question the sincerity of the pro-
fessions of any Representative of New England
State Of his desire to accomplish the professed
object of this legislation. He had helped in 1874,
to frame the first important bill on the subject
which had passed the House Of REPRESENTATIVES
That bill had encountered the opposition of the
old States rights doctrine, and Of strict party
vote, and when he heard, the other day, the
Senator from kentucky Mr.. Beckl charge those
who wanted to make the pending legislation just
and reasonable, as acting in the interest of the
railroads he felt like replying to him as the
worthy old deacon replied to the too
jealous convert that he had noticed that
young Christians were good deal like humble
1ees-much the largest when first Matched. He
was willing to go with the authors and trainers
Of the bill 30 far as they had gone in the protec-
sion Of the interstate trade of the country; but
be objected to two features of the conference
report, because he regarded those features an
attempt 10 strike down healthy competition; be-
cause ne regarded them as calculated to increase
nnd not to diminish the burdens which the rail-
roads already laid on the commerce of the coun-
try. And if this legislation should be defeated
3hose gentlemen would be responsible for its de-
feat who would not do all the good which the
bill could accomplish unless on condition that
they were also permitted to do what was unmis-
takably and purely evil. He denied that the
opposition to the conference report came from
the railroad managers; it came from men who
were alarmed lest, under its operation. the rates
ut which they were now able to do large and
profitable branches of business would be raised,
70 the ruin of their business. He asserted that
2hls country had the best cheapest and most
xonvcniers railroad service the face of the
globe. He gave figures showing the magnitude
of the foreign trade of Boston. and said that the
objection TO the fourth and fifth sections OF the
bill was that one (the long and short haul sec
tien) would destroy the cheapness OF transporta
tion on which that commerce depended, and the
othsr--the pooling section-would destroy thu
eteadiness OF the business by putting it out o.
the power of railroads to prevent railroad wars
and that constant fuctuation which the de
ssruction of all trade. He favored the recon
initial of the bill.
Mr. Sherman said he desired to state his rea
CONS for the vote he would give on this bill H,
believed that no bill of its Importance had eve
had such general support, not only among thu
people but in both houses of Congress. TIL
necessity for its passage was great, and wa
made greater by the recent decision of the Su
preme Court Whatever might have been tn
differences of opinion in the past, there was nov
concurrent sentiment among all classes of pee
pie, strongly represented in both houses of Con
gress, that there should be some general egisa
ton IN regard to interstate commerce He wa
free 10 Esy that il his vote on the bill would ten
to defeat its passage at this session he woul
vote differently from the way in which he in
tended to vote, but there was no such exgeney
The bill was in such m advanced state of cor
eIderation that, without question, it would pas
at the present session in some form or other
the bill were recommitted there would be sur
to be- action it. There was scarcely doub
hut that the conference committee would repor
w nnfVH nj
opinion behind it that no conference committe
could possibly prevent its passage Either hous
could at any time withdraw the bill from confer
ence if the conferees failed to perform thei
Huty, but there was pretense that there wa
any danger of that kind
This bill was something in the nature of
general appropriation bill, where item vote
by the house and persistently rejected b
the other should be Withdrawn by the hous
proposing It, So there ought to be no provisio
la this bill and no section in it that did not II
suit from the free and unbiased judgment c
botn houses IT there was any provision in thi
bill proposed by one house and not approved b
the other, the house making the propositio
should recede in order to secure the passage
the DILL. 1t was only by acting on that geners
rule OF policy that any bill Of the Importance G
Ibis one could pass through Congress Unde
these circumstances he should vote to recommi
tne DILL TO the same conferees, with view {
nave them look over the disputed points and sc
whether or not they can frame such provision
as will enable Senators and Representatives t
vote for the bill freely without any doubt as
the effect of any of its provisions That wa
the view which he took of the bill in its genera
form He thought there was great danger tina
the section as TO long and short hauls would d.
etroy the export trade of the country It nigh
Sor instance, divert the tea trade, which foun
It's course from Asia to Europe to the transcor
tinental railroads, to other routes like the Sue1
the Cape Horn, the Panama, or the Canada
routes So great was the competition for tbs
trade that it could be diverted even bv pebbl
much more by such a great restriction as IN
bill proposed.
MIR. Edmunds--What general provision woul
you suggest
Mr.. Sherman-I am not prepared to say VIII.
words ! would suggest, so as to max
provision for the export trade; but my gener,